I don't get the Roy Jones Jr. Adoration

I'll give this a thumbs up for being a well thought out post.

On the other hand, RJJ in the top of his reign did seem unbeatable, he sucked in guys and spat them out mangled. He had that Tyson aura where each fight was anticipated as an execution, and the final outcome inevitable. I think that is what adds that extra bit of shine to a fighter.

Obviously, nobody is unbeatable.

 

Good post. Welcome to the forum. I certainly don't think Jones was unbeatable, but I think you're underestimating his speed and reflexes. They were excellent for a man of his size, and he was completely in control of these gifts--he used them intelligently and strategically. He dominated some very good fighters in ways they'd never been treated before, and he embarrassed some guys who were quick, skilled, athletic boxers in their own rights.

PS - I'm probably in the minority around here, but I don't buy that having dozens and dozens of pro fights--often on relatively short notice or against unimpressive foes--really makes someone a much better fighter, so I don't hold it against Roy that he only had 40-50 fights before his career went downhill.

 

The kind of invincible aura Tyson had for three years, Jones had for a decade. I can't come to think of a fighter that looked levels above anyone he met for as long as Jones did.

In terms of overall speed I think he's unrivalled p4p.

 

Jones and Pac are the only ones I've seen who got away with being off balance and out of position even against elite level comp. Their natural atleticism and talent were just off the charts.

 

He was seen as unbeatable for looked like an age.
He was a supreme athlete in his prime capable of playing decent level basketball and then going onto KO someone decent in a prize fight.

His athletic gifts made him hugely entertaining he was fast, flashy and powerful who isn't going to watch that as a fight fan? As for not being as fast as Taylor or SRL so what? He was a few weight divisions higher, Was he faster than Ali? I think he was but that kind of point is up for debate all day long. He was amongst the fastest and most powerful in HIS division for a number of years.

He basically got away with murder because he rarely got hit and his offensive gifts meant guys couldn't get to him for sustained periods. The chin issues etc only really became apparent later in his career..

He wasn't just beating has been and never was's either he was beating top tier, guys. Both Hopkins and Toney would go on to become ATG's. Few fighters have resumes close to SRL etc but RJJ's is excellent.

Toney had 40 ish wins by the time he fought Jones and Jones got the win... In his prime, it's hard to fault how good he was how hard to beat he was. He fought terrific fighters world class fighters of all types and beat them and beat them impressively.

If you can't admire a guy who was able to beat a Hopkins, an experienced James Toney, Mike McCallum (past his best maybe but still decent, Hammer a durable world class boxer like Clinton Woods and make him look bang average, Go up the division's to beat a solid awkward heavyweight in John Ruiz, then bounce back down the weights which few ever do successfully to beat another World class leftie in Antonio Tarver then I really don't know what to say then add in the usual challengers the sanctioning bodies add in or a fighter choose for a pay like Harding, Hall etc and his resume is fine. No fighter is unbeatable but for a time Jones other than DQ loss was that man.

It sometimes hard to grade a fighter when his time has gone. You can look at boxrec and go why did he fight Glenn Kelly who was he? Well he was undefeated and got his crack and Jones sparked him.

Jones was beatable we saw that as his speed and reflexes declined but at his peak he was pretty close to Superman. His later defeats seem to have temped people memory of how good he was.

 

The Tarver losses probably have lessened his stock in fantasy match-up. So in that sense a lot depends on what one think he had left at that stage.

 

Who know? But I have frequently seen the Tarver losses used as evidence that rangy punches like Foster, Spinks and even Hearns would have him for breakfast.

 

Given what he'd done prior and what career stage he was at big upping the Tarver fights against him lies in the domain of an agenda imo.

 

I've seen it plenty of times. The nature of the Classic Forum beast isn't overly receptive to more recent fighters even going back to the 90's. Of course General leans toward the opposite.

It's blatantly obvious Jones was one talented beast of a fighter. His complete and utter domination of the ever popular Toney says it all.

 

Well if you use the eye test to rate Jones, the same eye test should tell you Jones was diminished in tarver 1 in which he took alot of shots and was completely and I mean completely shot in the Johnson fight.
For whatever reason his legs were just gone. Johnson wasn't exactly fast and Jones could not get off the ropes to save his life

 

The meaning of manos de mierda in english is hands of shi7 so you must be 15

 

LMAO

 

This thread is blasphemous!!!

But seriously, Jones seemed to have it all and pound for pound was one of the best ever. In his prime he was the real deal (not to take away from Holyfield)

 

Y'all musta forgot....or in TS case, never knew in the first place.

This content is protected